35
How come Lemmy/Piefed users seem to have a consensus of like "green mario" is the solution to this and that, but simultaneously oppose death penalty? (piefed.ca)
submitted 22 hours ago by to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

So killing is not okay except when its internet-approved vigilantism?

Example: "Polititian commutes death sentences" Lemmy be like "good", but then when "Politician condemns assassination" Lemmy have a problem with condeming political violence?

(Like Gavin Newsom commutes all death row immates in California vs when Democratic polititians condemned Luigi Mangione)

Or are these different groups of Lemmings?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 22 hours ago (1 child)

I think "how come group who believes X also believes Y" type questions often fail to account for the fact that there is always more variation within a group than between groups - the people saying X and the people saying Y are often different.

That said, i personally support killing the rich and oppose the death penalty because both decentralize power, which reduces inequality and thus improves society.

But i really don't think that many people here share those views.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago

    All the rich have to do avoid death , in this scenario, is share their stuff around a bit more. Doesn't sound that hard to me. Biggest problem with death penalty, in my opinion, is the fallibility and corruptability of the justice system.

    Its not that hard to see when people have accumulated excess wealth - at least in terms of physical stuff like land. I'd love to guillotine away all excess concentrations of power, but that's not as easy to observe, so start with land, and see if they get the message.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent